I know there's a lot of gun related bait going around recently but this is one thing that I've been thinking about for...

I know there's a lot of gun related bait going around recently but this is one thing that I've been thinking about for a while and I'm interested to hear what y'all think.

One common argument I hear against increased gun control is the fact that criminals aren't going to follow the new laws, so these increased measures would only effect law-abiding citizens.

This argument makes sense, but I have one issue with it.

What underground/black market gun markets is some random 14 year old white kid from the suburbs going to have access to? To my knowledge, the vast majority of recent school shootings have used legally purchased guns that the kids themselves bought or that they took from their parents.

My question: How would some random nerdy highschooler with no access to legally purchased guns acquire something like an AR-15? (He wouldn't)

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/world/amp/33-dead-130-injured-china-knife-wielding-spree-n41966
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

All laws only affect law-abiding citizens

In the grand scheme of gun related deaths, ones related to mass shootings by rifles is a tiny fraction.

If law abiding citizen gave up guns (wont happen) , home invasions would skyrocket.

14-year-olds can't buy guns in the US, legally.

>In the grand scheme of gun related deaths, ones related to mass shootings by rifles is a tiny fraction.
>If law abiding citizen gave up guns (wont happen)

You're right about this. I'm not a supported of banning all guns or anything like that. I just think we should make it significantly harder (or even impossible) for some people to purchase rifles like the AR-15.

Self defense with a gun is fine, but an AR-15 isn't necessary for self defense.

Random homicides with guns are bad, but I feel like it would be extremely easy to prevent school shootings by limiting children's access to extremely dangerous weapons. Solving gun violence as a whole is a different issue in my eyes.

You're right, but their parents can. That's how (almost) all of the recent school shooters got the guns they used.

spicfag here, you get it from your drug connect or someone connected to him. Trust me, if you can meet up with your connect for a purchase than why not meet up with him outside "da hood" for a gun transaction.

ARs and AKs are harder to find, but they do pop up once awhile albeit a bit beat up.

your welcome

What black market could the parents of a 14 year old white kid from the suburb have access to?

I don't believe it would be nearly this easy for some random nerdy highschool kid to purchase an AR from their drug dealer.

>hey man can you get me an AR with like 150 bullets? I need it for no reason
>sure dude, as a person that sells dimebags of weed to highschool kids in the suburbs, I have no problem selling rifles and ammo to them that they obviously have no use for besides murder.

Probably none. That's my point. Sure there would be a handful of parents with illegally purchased rifles, but would they be careless enough to allow their children to access it? Even if they did, would the rate of children taking these illegal guns be anywhere close to what it is now?

OP do you want to be stabbed to death or shot to death?

That was supposed to be a rhetorical question. They are adults. They are capable of finding weapons regardless of the law.

If I'm in school and there's a person with a knife or a person with a gun, I'd rather get attacked by a knife.

This kid in Florida shot through walls and shot dozens of students. That would not be possible with a knife. If he had a knife, he'd run into a classroom (if it were unlocked) stab a couple of kids, and then get overpowered. He wouldn't be able to kill anywhere close to the amount of people he killed with a gun.

I disagree with this. I'm an adult and I would have no way of finding an illegal gun. I could probably ask my drug dealer, but I doubt he'd have access to rifles and even if he did I doubt he'd sell one to me.

Some 50-60 year old family with no connection to criminals is going to have an EXTREMELY hard time finding a source for illegal weapons.

just because you dont "know a guy" doesnt mean everyone else doesnt, faggot

Good. I'm glad you won't be able to commit a mass murder with a semi-automatic weapon if AR-15s are outlawed.

Did I ever say it would be impossible for people to find a gun? No. In fact, I mentioned in multiple posts that I knew people would be able to.

I'm saying it would be much harder, and much less common for random normal families and children to access them.

they don't sell to people who look like they're going to shoot up a school, you're SOL

this is not true it would be exactly the same and the measures you suggest are not worth the effort

It actually is this simple. Believe what you want OP. At least until you move out here to New Mexico and realize that there's gangs indoctrinating 7-15 year old kids. For fucks sake, my gf's 14 yr. Old cousin does nothing but meth and posts videos of him shooting up random houses.

So you agree that nerdy highschoolers wouldn't be able to buy illegal guns if they're outlawed? That's exactly my point.

How would it be exactly the same? Currently, you can go to a gun store, do a background check, fill out some forms and shit, wait however many days or weeks, and you got a gun.

If it were illegal, how would some middle aged white family with ZERO connection to criminals buy a high powered rifle?

Believe it.
I'm Australian, and even I could've easily purchased a gun at that age.
You know someone that knows someone that knows a guy

because what you are saying is false stop shilling my Sup Forums

He said it's drug dealers selling the weapons and if not, the drug dealers have CONNECTIONS. Learn to read you stupid fuck.

I'm talking about middle-class neighborhoods with no real gang presence. I'd consider gang violence to be a separate issue from school shootings.

Sure if a kid lives in a gang's territory and knows some thugs, they could get a gun easily. I'm really just talking about kids with no criminal connections.

I'm not saying banning ARs would completely stop school shootings or completely stop people from getting them. I'm just saying it would make it much harder for most people.

An AR 15 really isnt much different than a lot of hunting rifles. They function the same - the cosmetics are diffrrent. You could make a large capacity magazine for a semi auto hunting rifle and it would work the same as an AR. Its that scary black plastic.

your argument does not address the issue therefore we should do nothing

>What underground/black market gun markets is some random 14 year old white kid from the suburbs going to have access to
all of them near any city > 100K, cunt
like me in bville
hello weekly drive into the city
live more cunt

If you own a firearm, it is solely your responsibility to ensure it is locked up and no one has access to it. Leaving a firearm unsecured is no different than a straw purchase for a child.

I did read it.

I don't think the drug dealer selling dimes to priviledged white highschoolers would be comfortable giving his weapons connections to them.

>sure kid I don't have any guns but lemme introduce you to my supplier in the city. I have no issue helping you get a gun to shoot up your school with and I'm sure my supplier won't either.

Facebook

>(He wouldn't)

Yes he would, dumbass.

so lemme get this straight. This is the process for some nerdy 14 year old suburban kid to buy a high powered rife

>1. drive to the city
>2. magically and immediately gain the knowledge of where the blackmarket gun markets are
>3. Buy gun

Explain why you think that. That's the reason I started this thread.

That is why I think they should just raise the age limit to 21 for all semi-auto rifles, shotguns and pump-action shotguns. At 18, all you should be able to buy are break-action or bolt action rifles. Most of my family hunts and they will all tell you that you don't need a semi-auto anything to hunt. With the first shot you either hit it, or it's run away. Hell, half of them use black powder.

The honest truth is that no, it isn't separate. In the most recent shooting involving the 19 year old, it mentioned that he had ties and was even trained by a local supremacy group. Unfortunately, I wrote half of this response without further reading your post until just meow because that's how I reply to longer texts. AR-15's certainly aren't the most common weapon used in mass shootings. A 7 year old kid here in Roswell took his father's shotgun to school and took off another child's face. The problem here isn't guns, the access to them or even the type.

I'm a Britfag and was against public gun ownership (I live in Bradford before the 'hurr durr guns don't exist in the UK' - every cunt has a gun), but you guy's are having so many shootings there's no fucking way I wouldn't be armed to the fucking teeth if I lived there. I can do MMA all day but I can't choke out half a clip of bullets.


This. I know a handful of straight and narrow people.

Any one of the 1000 .onion sites that would appear overnight if such a ban was enacted.

The thing I don't get is the trip over capacity. Anyone who's halfway decent with a firearm can reload it in a second or two and resume firing. So rather someone shoots up the place with an AR and five 30 round magazines or a 45 and a backpack full of fifteen 10 round magazines, it's really not gonna change the casualty level that much I don't believe, so where do we draw the line on capacity?

Yeah, I think that if you have kids, you should have a safe for your guns. If you can't afford the safe, then you can't afford the guns.

>In the most recent shooting involving the 19 year old, it mentioned that he had ties and was even trained by a local supremacy group.

This was later determined to be untrue.

>The problem here isn't guns, the access to them or even the type.

Then what is the problem here? Mental health? Did that child kill his classmate because he had serious mental health problems, or did he do it because his dumbfuck father gave him ACCESS to the TYPE of weapon capable of easily killing someone.

Underrated post.
>avoiding stabbings through walls
Unless you're fucking around in Crystal Lake.

When you compare the percentage of all murders that involve a gun between the US and countries in Europe with strict controls, you find that the gun control doesn't have much effect. We have more murders overall thus more gun murders, but legal access to firearms doesn't up the ratio.

I suppose 14 year old white kids from the suburbs don't have access to marijuana, do they?

Misinformation, he was trained as part of a JROTC program that was in part funded by the NRA. He wasn’t trained by white supremacists. Bums me out people just take the word of what they hear and don’t look into anything anymore.

The dumbfuck father is entirely to blame.

Columbine shooting. Mom bought the guns for him.

why was it not the mother or the kids fault?
or the teachers for not recognizing that the child was a threat?
or the security staffs fault for not stopping him?

How did we miss him when the FBI had multiple signs?

I think there is a gap between mental health record so and federal database that is used to check for background

buying weed is not the same as buying a semi-automatic rifle.

I bought weed in highschool, no (few) small-time drug dealer that sells to children is going to sell them high powered rifles.

But also, I'm not claiming that it would be impossible for all would-be shooters to get guns, I'm just saying it would be much more difficult, and in SOME cases, impossible.

I went to JROTC here in Washington in 1999. If it's still the same thing, they don't train the kids for any kind of combat at all. It's just PT, formations, military history, and marksman training with pellet rifles.

Would the mother have access to underground gun/drug rings in order to buy the guns that she legally bought? No.

If the guns she bought were illegal rather than legal, she would not have bought them for her child, and her child would not have killed his classmates.

>would the rate of children taking these illegal guns be anywhere close to what it is now
Mate you are asking what the change in occurence would be in an event that is so rare already that any statistician would lable it a statistical anomaly. Any experiment to measure the change would have 10x more error and uncertainty than the actual measured change.

I stand corrected mah nigger. Source is always appreciated here though m80.
>This was later determined to be untrue
Sauce your shit dooooo
You can capitalize ACCESS or even TYPE all you want. WHAT NEEDS TO BE REALIZED HERE IS THAT IT WAS THE FATHER'S FAULT.

In the UK you can get a firearm from a smack dealer so easily.

This post really isn’t relevant. You wouldn’t think that another state almost 20 years later might be different? lmfao

What random 14 year old kid from the suburbs is going to know a fucking heroin dealer?

The mom too, sure. Not the kid though. A 7 year old doesn't have much of a moral compass. Security at an elementary school is usually just a cop on call and PTA members.

Yeah, you're right. They were probably doping full combat drills.

>323 million people in the US according to the last census.
>about 30k gun deaths per year (including suicides and accidents).
>even assuming a 1:1 ratio, that's 30k people who lose their shit and kill people per year.
>(30000÷323000000)×100 = 0.0093%
You want to ban guns for 99.9917% of the population because MAYBE 0.0093% of the population can't handle their shit?
Why don't we try banning alcohol because people drive drunk, kill, or commit domestic abuse when using it?
Or why don't we ban cars, because a minority of the population can't fucking drive?

If the father weren't allowed to have that gun (or if he was required by law to store it in a safe place that the child couldn't access OR if he had to store the ammo in a separate location) the incident could have been avoided entirely.

>inb4 what if he didn't follow the law

The possibility of being charged for manslaughter/similar crime for being careless with gun storage would almost completely eliminate the father's desire to break the law in such a way.

My little brother was selling heroin for pakkis when he was 11/12. But we were in the scum bag poor area.

No, but how can you compare 1999 Washington to 2018 Florida? It’s just not relevant, don’t be butthurt because of it.

Why would the mother be at fault? Was it her shotgun? I mean, she might be partially to blame but is it her responsibility to lock up the shotgun? Does a teacher come to school every day with the mentality that a 7 year old is about to attempt murder on his classmate?
This.

semi automatic firearms ( pull the trigger once, one round is fired ) like ar-15's .. are not going anywhere. ar-15s are defense rifles. they are very effective for self defense, defending one's home against a home invasion, or protecting one's business, like from looters and arsonists during the LA riots.

we also maintain arms, particularly rifles, that are of a similar capability to the small arms our governments military uses, because that is how a free people can be a check on power for their own government running amok.

semi auto firearms are also very useful for hunting game, pests, etc, and they are a lot of fun for target shooting.

making inanimate tools harder to obtain will not stop people determined to harm others from doing so. they will find a way. all that kid in FL had to do was rent a UHAUL, he was 19.. pull the fire alarm, and wait until a bunch of students came outside, then RUN THEM DOWN.

or make a bomb. the list is endless. disarming the law abiding only makes them defenseless victims who have no chance of defending themselves. this is why gun free zones are absurd.

this doesn't even get into the reality, that rounding up millions of rifles is impossible and even attempting it would start a civil war. or that even if you could magically round up all scary rifles, people can simply make more of them in their garage with a 3d printer. the cat is out of the bag, and it's not going back in. better get used to it.

oh, and come and take it, BITCH.

30k people who lose their shit, what about the people they're icing?

I don't support banning guns outright. I support passing laws that make it harder for children to access high powered rifles. As I said in another post, solving gun violence is an entirely different issue.

Banning AR-15s for certain people, or requiring that they be stored in a way that makes children unable to access and use them, would prevent the vast majority of future school shootings.

I think Op just doesn't understand the mental illness that goes along with the intricate planning when deciding to kill people.

Yes OP it would be pretty hard for a teenager to obtain such a weapon, but if they are deranged enough they could search and learn for months or even years to find weapons.

Unfortunately the amazing intelligence of a sociopath is usually use only for evil intent.

Where there is a will there is a way, even for 14 year olds. If you're looking for a more deep explanation then you probably won't find one, some humans are just villains.

I'm talking about middle class suburban kids shooting up their schools because they get bullied.

The ability for these children to easily purchase an illegal gun is going to be much harder than it would be for someone living in a scum bag poor area where 11/12 year olds are selling and doing heroin.

I suppose I'll use a regurgitated argument as well since you can't seem to find an original or well thought out point.
>If there had been as much protection over that school as there is with banks, credit card companies and even simple businesses, the entire situation would have been avoided and a child could have gained a second chance to gain a welcomed place in society.

>"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure,” - Thomas Jefferson
Freedom isn't free, nigger.

>muh high powered rifles
Define 'high powered rifle.'
Define 'assault weapon.'
Define these in the strictest of terms, such that there is no wriggle room for politicians to include unintended items.
>Banning AR-15s for certain people,
Guns as a whole already banned for certain people. The mentally unfit and felons.
>requiring that they be stored in a way that makes children unable to access and use them
Parents with sense already do this--which is most gun owning parents. What's going to stop little Jamal from getting a Dremmel and cutting the lock off the gun case and taking his daddy's gun to school?
Not a goddamn thing, if the kid is determined.

Not on home fucking soil. Asshat.

Yes. Especially on home fucking soil. Because that is where it matters most.

>Buy prepaid credit card
>Buy BTC
>Buy gun
>Hide delivery from parents

This

41.7 million kids age 10-19 in america per 2015 census.
Say we have 1 school shooting every week thats 52 kids.

I feel like 52/41,731,223 kids (0.00012%) are creative enough to find a gun or any method of killing a shitload of classmates no matter how hard you make them to get.

Shit just imagine how many of the little fuckers come to Sup Forums.

Dis.

So you're saying you want to put guns in schools. You are part of the problem lol. I'm joking though. When I went to high school, we had 2 armed police officers on campus at all times thanks to Columbine. I doubt a school shooter would have been successful. These days though, there isn't enough of a budget for that and it keeps getting cut.

I don't think you understand the quote, at all.

That argument is deeply flawed. 82% of guns used in mass shootings were purchased legally.

According to some studies 61% of mass shooters had prior signs of mental illness.

Here in Canada, where we have sane effective gun control, those people would have never been able to get a gun to begin with.

We don't have mass shootings here for the most part. In 35 years we've had less than America has had just last year alone.

>I'm joking though
I've been bamboozled
Don't get me wrong though, I have respect for this crunchy. To be specific, I have respect for what it was founded upon. However, the one's who these decisions on where money goes, have no fucking clue what they're doing.

The human psyche is a very fragile and random thing. No one, not me or you, or any type of law will be perfect enough to counteract devastating events such as these.

Whether creating, deleting, or reinforcing a current existing one. Disasters like these will continue to happen. Those extremist people that lean too far on both sides need to stop being idiots, and get their heads out of their agenda ass.

People have a right to defend their families and themselves. You really cant do that without a gun.

Those that are saying that the current gun laws have no flaws, well, look at what just happen.

Both sides are idiots and wrong. It really pisses me off when these type of people use something like this to push their own ideas. No one can govern or control anything. No one will be able to come up with a perfect law that will eliminate problems like this in the future. Unless a the US becomes some dystopian big brother nation. The sad truth is, anything can be a weapon. End of story. No matter what this event will have on gun laws, this will happen again. In one way, shape, or form.

So everyone shut the fuck up with your own fake self-righteousness and mourn for those young lives that were lost on that day.

>How would some random nerdy highschooler with no access to legally purchased guns acquire something like an AR-15? (He wouldn't)
>I just think we should make it significantly harder (or even impossible) for some people to purchase rifles like the AR-15.
Literal bait thread.
OP is a faggot.

Is weed accessible in your kids highschool?

this is no different you dumbfuck

Part 1/2

>semi ... riots.
Upper/middle class families in the suburbs don't need an ar-15 to defend themselves.

>we also... amok.

How would rifles defend you against a government capable of destroying your town with drones/tanks/missiles/nukes/etc. The revolutionary war was fought with muskets and cannons. Also, are you really so paranoid that you think our government is going to become so oppressive that you truly need to go to war against our own military?

>semi auto ... shooting.

Other posters have said they're not useful for hunting. But even if they are, are they necessary? Should they be as easy to buy as they are now just because they're "fun"? I'm sure flying and shooting a military drone would be fun as fuck, and would be super effective for killing pests, but militarized drones aren't legal for people like us to own.

>making ... DOWN.

If he were younger than 18 he would have had to get a fake ID to rent a UHAUL. Also, it's fucking ridiculous that you only need to be 18 to rent a truck like that. They should increase the age requirement for that (which would make it much harder for him to access it). ALSO, if I had to choose between running away from a truck outside or cowering in fear in my classroom as some kid shoots my through a wall, I'd choose the truck.

2/2

>or make ... absurd.

Yes, gun free zones are absurd. And a kid could make a bomb. But it's far more difficult for a child to build a bomb than it currently is for him to access a gun. I'm supporting legislation that makes would-be school shooters go through as many obstacles as possible. (Anything harder than 1. Buy gun 2. Kill people.)

>this ... it.

I don't think the governent would attempt to round up millions of rifles. I think it's far more likely that they'd outlaw some of them/change the law that makes them harder for children to get them. Parents who ignore this law that then have kids take their guns and murder their classmates would then by charged with a crime. Also, building a gun with a 3D printer is still much harder than just buying one. As I said before, I support (almost) any measure that makes it harder for these kids to become murderers.

I thought freedom, was a buck-0-five

>How would some random nerdy highschooler with no access to legally purchased guns acquire something like an AR-15?

Why does it need to be an AR-15? Virginia Tech was committed with a couple of Glock pistols. Killed 30 some odd people...

Can a kid get an AR-15 from his little nickel and dime weed dealer? Probably not. A pistol? Ehh... more in the realm of possibility.

You don't know what an AR-15 is, shut up.

Truth is that America already has so many guns in homes already that placing a massive restriction on them would probably cause a surge of home invasions. School shootings may reduce in number, but as has been said before, Criminals don't follow the law. Crime would be rampant.

>leftists being leftists
Commies...pls...

Because, THEY DON'T WANT PEOPLE OWNING WEAPONS THAT CAN FIRE MORE ROUNDS IN SHORT AMOUNTS OF TIME.
THEY ARE PIECES OF SHIT .
THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT PERSONAL SAFETY.
THEY HATE FREEDOM.

Sounds better for me than
>Buy gun/get gun from parents

Why shouldn't we make it harder for people to kill others?

Do you truly believe buying a rifle is as easy as buying a dimebag of weed from some sleazeball drug dealer?

I'm not claiming that it would be impossible for these kids to buy guns (including pistols). I'm just saying it would be harder, and personally I'd rather be attacked by a kid with a pistol than a kid with a rifle.

Good response homie

>Criminals don't follow the low so we should not have laws.

Republicans are fucking retarded sometimes.

google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/world/amp/33-dead-130-injured-china-knife-wielding-spree-n41966
Where they can't get guns, theyll get more people.

They'll kill more people with knives than guns? Really? That's a real thing that you believe?

THESE PIECES OF SHIT ARGUE THAT CITIZENS DON'T NEED 30 ROUND MAGAZINES.
AS IF A MOMENT MAY NEVER COME ALONG WHERE YOU'LL NEED TO SQUEEZE OF ENOUGH ROUNDS IN RESPONSE.
THEY ARE JUST TRYING TO TAKE FREEDOMS.
PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

guns don't matter, put in airport type security
problem solved

>...and personally I'd rather be attacked by a kid with a pistol than a kid with a rifle.

You have a preference? Any particular kind of pistol that you might prefer? I mean, are you a shoot-me-in-the-face-with-a-glock kind of guy or a pop-me-in-the-chest-with-that-walther-a-couple-of-times sort of a man?

the stupid ass government already has all the laws in place, they just suck ass at coordinating.

that former military dude who shot up shit a while back? he should've been caught by a background check and denied a purchase (or arrested for attempting to purchase as he was dishonorably discharged)

the kid who shot up florida would have easily been caught too had the fbi not been so busy in it's years-long campaign to forge a russian connection to the trump campaign.

look at the dude in california who just got busted too (dozens of ARs, a few machine guns, and 66K rounds of ammo). he was a convicted felon, but was still somehow able to purchase and even register firearms after his 2001 felony conviction.

it's not a lack of laws or control measures, it's a lack of competent motherfuckers to pool data and coordinate efforts to shore up gaps in the existing system.

i'm all for retards not getting guns, but the idea of outright banning shit is what many people take issue with (as shit still sucked under the brady bill)

what's retarded about that that?